Defunding Obamacare: GOP Is “Playing with Fire”

[Mariahxxx]

but clinton was a good president. he got things done and left office with the economy and the standard of living much better than when he got there.

 

[xfire]

Nixon was a liar and a crook. Plain and simple.

Nixon was a liar and a crook, and a whole host of other things, but his presidency wasn't a total failure. Looking at things in strictly black and white terms isn't helpful or accurate. I've never been a fan of the Nixon administration but I'm objective enough to see the good and the bad. Just as the Clinton presidency wasn't defined by his cock, Nixon's time in office was more than Watergate.

 

[Master Roshi]

The Clintons SMH Bill's father might actually be Winthrop Rockefeller of the Rockefeller Dynasty, The Clintons have a nasty history during their time in Arkansas, a good book on the subject is "The Clinton Chronicles" and man I stopped counting the bodies that disappeared under The Clinton administration at 200 and I won't even get into the drug dealing

 

[Mariahxxx]

I could give a shit what happened before he was president. they are ALL fucking criminals. I care that he did a good job running the show and we ended up better off than when he started. bush pissed it all away as fast as he could and had a majority house that loved blank checks. at least clinton was willing to cooperate and compromise to get things done that needed to be done. I dont like NAFTA at all, but the budget was balanced and there was a surplus when he left office. who gives a shit about that other stuff? the kennedy's were criminals. reagan was a criminal while he was IN OFFICE as was Bush #1. Bush #2 (how appropritate) should be in jail also. the big difference is he fucked the country up, while Clinton made it better.

 

[Master Roshi]

I could give a shit what happened before he was president. they are ALL fucking criminals. I care that he did a good job running the show and we ended up better off than when he started. bush pissed it all away as fast as he could and had a majority house that loved blank checks. at least clinton was willing to cooperate and compromise to get things done that needed to be done. I dont like NAFTA at all, but the budget was balanced and there was a surplus when he left office. who gives a shit about that other stuff? the kennedy's were criminals. reagan was a criminal while he was IN OFFICE as was Bush #1. Bush #2 (how appropritate) should be in jail also. the big difference is he fucked the country up, while Clinton made it better.

actually Mariah the majority of the social security trust fund looting happened under Bill's watch and the national debt increased as well, I know he came on TV and said "surplus's as far as the eye can see" but he was lying and Bill's last act as president was his worst IMO, he signed off on the dismantling of the glass steagall act which was an act that kept commercial banking separate from investment banking which meant that if an investment banker wanted to invest a ton of money in the stock market he had to use funds that were already on deposit with his institution, after the dismantling of this act, investment banks were allowed to go into the savings accounts of the average joe and take their digital money out of their accounts in order to basically use them to gamble with on the stock market hence one of the reasons that lead up to the crash of 2008, this act was put into place after the crash of 1929 to prevent the bankers from reeking havoc on the money markets because in the end they can never have enough profits and they always want more and more

 

[Mariahxxx]

well Newt Gingrich constantly brags about the balanced budget that happened under Clinton and the reduction in spending and prosperity.

and yes, glass steagal was another mistake he made. and that digital money actually is the product of the central bank aka federal reserve

but i agree he wasn't perfect and did some shit i don't agree with, but considering what came after with Bush he was a breath of fresh air.

 

[Master Roshi]

well Newt Gingrich constantly brags about the balanced budget that happened under Clinton and the reduction in spending and prosperity.

and yes, glass steagal was another mistake he made. and that digital money actually is the product of the central bank aka federal reserve

but i agree he wasn't perfect and did some shit i don't agree with, but considering what came after with Bush he was a breath of fresh air.

Fig Newton is a terrible liar, and you don't have to watch a horror movie to get scared just do a little serious study on the Bush Family history, The Clintons are no better though IMO and yes the private federal reserve bank of NY is where all the action is in the US, they have this fractional reserve banking system down to a science, dollar inc is a franchise that has been in the works for the last 100 plus years and anyone who tries to mess with the franchise will have an ill stroke of health, its like you said Mariah 99 percent of them are criminals

 

[Master Roshi]

remember that over 90 percent of everything we call money today in the world is digital not physical, when people get paid working on the books, they get paid via check most of the time, not physical cash, and because the Glass Steagall act was dismantled, the investment banks were allowed to go into everyone's savings and checking accounts and pull the digital funds right out of them so they could use those same funds to leverage and gamble, most people believe that when they go up to their bank's ATM machine to withdraw funds and use their debit card to log on to their account which brings up their balance, that the numbers they see on screen are always in their account but what most people don't know is that the banks use a computer program to show the proper balance that each customer should have in their account on the ATM screen, once the customer logs off, that digital amount of funds is sucked right back out of their account so it can be used somewhere else in the country or around the world, this is why if every one living in the US or in any other country went into their banks on the same day at the same time and asked for their money physically in hand, the banking system would crash in minutes because the banks don't have the physical stores of the customer's money in their vaults (Glass Steagall required them to have funds on deposit)......and as far as name calling goes, dammmn you are fine (sorry just had to throw that out there as if you have not heard it a million times already)

 

[Rey C.]

remember that over 90 percent of everything we call money today in the world is digital not physical, when people get paid working on the books, they get paid via check most of the time, not physical cash, and because the Glass Steagall act was dismantled, the investment banks were allowed to go into everyone's savings and checking accounts and pull the digital funds right out of them so they could use those same funds to leverage and gamble, most people believe that when they go up to their bank's ATM machine to withdraw funds and use their debit card to log on to their account which brings up their balance, that the numbers they see on screen are always in their account but what most people don't know is that the banks use a computer program to show the proper balance that each customer should have in their account on the ATM screen, once the customer logs off, that digital amount of funds is sucked right back out of their account so it can be used somewhere else in the country or around the world, this is why if every one living in the US or in any other country went into their banks on the same day at the same time and asked for their money physically in hand, the banking system would crash in minutes because the banks don't have the physical stores of the customer's money in their vaults (Glass Steagall required them to have funds on deposit)......and as far as name calling goes, dammmn you are fine (sorry just had to throw that out there as if you have not heard it a million times already)

Although I agree with you that the repeal of Glass-Stegall led to some very bad things for the banking system... and the public, it is not correct that banks (commercial) have ever been required to hold 100% of deposits on hand. In fact, before Glass-Stegall went into effect, the capital ratio (the amount of equity capital that banks held in reserve for every dollar that was on deposit) was around 20%. After the passage of Glass-Stegall (and the formation of the FDIC insurance program), the capital ratio fell to 10%. This is because the system had greater safeguards built into it after passage. If banks had to hold 100% of the money that has been deposited with them in their vaults, they couldn't make loans and they couldn't make money. In basic terms, a $1000 savings account represents a "loan" to a bank. The banks pays you, say 1%, puts $100 of your deposit in reserve, and loans $900 of your $1000 deposit to farmer Jones to buy cattle or whatever and he pays the bank 3%. That spread or delta is where the bank turns a profit.

But again, I agree that allowing the investment banking arms of commercial banks to speculate, especially on derivatives, has been a disaster.

 

[Master Roshi]

yup good correction, I should have added the investment institutions were required to hold the deposits not the commercial ones, my bad, but the system would still crash if everyone went into the bank and demanded physical withdrawal all at the same time and if anyone is interested in seeing a good example of a state run bank then look in The Bank of North Dakota, this bank was able to weather the great depression of 1929 without too many problems

 

[Master Roshi]

and the FDIC would be completely useless in the scenario I just described

 

[bobjustbob]

the democracts wanted a single payer program which is much more easily understand and cuts the insurance companies out of the deal. this version that got passed was what the republicans wanted and is a nearly identical version of romney's health care plan when he was governor.

and the right continues to make demands like they didn't get their asses kicked in the last election. time for someone to let the republicans know that when you don't win, you don't get to make such demands.

and if anyone gives 2 shits I have been looking at different plans and Ill be saving about 40% for identical coverage.

Yea, that's all very nice. This will be better health insurrance then you previously have. You pay out of your pocket without an employer kicking in half. Now for those people that are currently with the kick in, how will their policies change to fit the miminum requirements of coverage? There are things that must be included to fit the law, right?

 

[mikexmoran]

Well that does it. I'm not voting for Obama in 2016.

 

[mikexmoran]

Amusing....very amusing.

I drove by Pete King's office (I live in that town for you stalkers out there) and there were protesters.

They were protesting him for not supporting the House Bill that would defund Obamacare (aka Affordable yada yada) because he doesn't agree with the shutdown.

There were idiots actually yelling and holding signs that he supports Obama.


I tell you, its not the heat, its that stupidity.

 

[Rey C.]

but the system would still crash if everyone went into the bank and demanded physical withdrawal all at the same time

Yes, it would. But over the history of banking, no bank has ever been in a position to satisfy that sort of immediate demand for deposits. That would require a 100% reserve. And by keeping 100% of deposits in reserve, there is absolutely no profit motive. It would be counter-intuitive to borrow money from depositors and not be able to loan some portion of that money to borrowers, so that a profit could be made on the interest spread.

As for the Bank of North Dakota, it operates more as a sort of state owned "mini central bank" and has relatively few retail services. It could only satisfy a run on the bank by drawing on funds from the taxpayers of North Dakota and the Fed... where it maintains an account. That is no different than how the FDIC would have to satisfy a run on its member banks. The Bank of North Dakota also does not maintain a 100% deposit reserve.

 

[Mayhem]

It occurs to me that the GOP/TP humped their own pooch by insisting on calling the ACA "ObamaCare". They chose the name. And the name is why they hate it. They're not worried that it won't work, they're worried that it will. And this is where the hilarity ensues. If they had insisted on calling it RomneyCare, if they had championed it as a Republican plan that the Democrats were forced to embrace, they wouldn't have us all in the mess we are in now.

It's not the policy they hate, just the name. The name they invented.

 

[Mariahxxx]

Vegas casinos are required to have a 100% reserve for every chip they have. why shouldn't the banks be required to as well?

 

[Rey C.]

Vegas casinos are required to have a 100% reserve for every chip they have. why shouldn't the banks be required to as well?

To be honest, I have no knowledge of how casinos operate, other than that they allow people bet their own money in games of chance that are stacked in the house's favor. I assume that because their business is structured in a way that there could (potentially) be a large immediate demand for money, that's why that's in place. But I really don't know. With commercial banks, basically they take deposits (which are liabilities on their balance sheet) and make loans (which are assets). If they had to keep 100% of the money that they accept as deposits in reserve, they couldn't make loans. The only thing they could do at that point would be to borrow money from other sources and try to make a profit off the spread of whatever their interest costs would be for that and whatever they could lend the money for. There would be no reason for them to accept deposits and pay interest to depositors at that point. And short of some sort of economic calamity, there is little likelihood of a run on an FDIC insured bank.

 

[Mariahxxx]

Gaming law requires all casinos to have matching cash on hand for every chip in play.

 

[Jack Davenport]

They keep more than matching cash because casinos pay odds.